Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This communication is response to the application filed 11/20/2023 havingclaims 1-20 pending and presented for examination.
Priority
2. Application filed on 11/20/2023 has no priority.
Drawings
3. The drawings were received on 08/30/2017 and these drawings are accepted.
4. Information Disclosure Statement
No IDS filed.
Oath/Declaration
4. The Oath/Declaration filed on 09/25/2013 is accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
1. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
2. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2,13,17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US Publication US 20200329340 A1 Rahman et al. (Hereinafter “Rahman").
As per claim 1, Rahman teaches a method, comprising: receiving, by a server, a plurality of signal measurements associated with a coverage area, wherein the plurality of signal measurements are collected over a measurement period by a device within the coverage area while the device is associated with a fixed location (para 0071-0076], fig. 1,4,8 base station serving node receiving by the a coverage area, associated signals from the femto station is in the covered area , are collected over a measurement period by a device within the coverage area while the device is associated with a fixed location whereas the base station); identifying, by the server, a best signal measurement from the plurality of signal measurements, wherein the best signal measurement represents a baseline radio frequency (RF) environment for the coverage area without a threshold amount of interference or transient changes in the coverage area, and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements ((para 0071-0076],fig. 8, determine based on the received information from the plurality of signals identifies the signal strength and environment for the coverage area a strength of the cellular signal is greater than the perceived signal strength and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements); and providing, by the server, an output based on the baseline RF environment (para 0071-0076],fig. 2, base station node provide the baseline RF environment from the incoming information f the perceived signal strength and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements). 20200329340
As per claim 2, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of signal measurements include one or more of: reference signal received power (RSRP) measurements, reference signal received quality (RSRQ) measurements, channel quality indicator (CQI) measurements, or signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) measurements (para 0077], signal measurements include one or more of: reference signal received power (RSRP) measurements).
As per claim 13, Rahman teaches a server, comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive a plurality of signal measurements associated with a coverage area, wherein the plurality of signal measurements are taken over a period of time by a device within the coverage area while the device is associated with a fixed location (para 0071-0076], fig. 1,4,8 base station serving node receiving by the a coverage area, associated signals from the femto station is in the covered area , are collected over a measurement period by a device within the coverage area while the device is associated with a fixed location whereas the base station, wherein the mobile station is associated with fixed location under the base station and base station unit); determine, from the plurality of signal measurements, a baseline radio frequency (RF) environment for the coverage area without a threshold amount of interference or transient changes in the coverage area, and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements (para 0071-0076],fig. 8, determine based on the received information from the plurality of signals identifies the signal strength and environment for the coverage area a strength of the cellular signal is greater than the perceived signal strength and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements); and provide an output based on the baseline RF environment (para 0071-0076],fig. 2, base station node provide the baseline RF environment from the incoming information f the perceived signal strength and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements).
As per claim 17, Rahman teaches non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a server, cause the server to: receive a plurality of signal measurements associated with a coverage area, wherein the plurality of signal measurements are taken over a period of time by a device within the coverage area while the device is associated with a fixed location (para 0071-0076], fig. 1,4,8 base station serving node receiving by the a coverage area, associated signals from the femto station is in the covered area , are collected over a measurement period by a device within the coverage area while the device is associated with a fixed location whereas the base station, wherein the mobile station is associated with fixed location under the base station and base station unit); determine, from the plurality of signal measurements, a baseline radio frequency (RF) environment for the coverage area without a threshold amount interference or transient changes in the coverage area, and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements (para 0071-0076],fig. 8, determine based on the received information from the plurality of signals identifies the signal strength and environment for the coverage area a strength of the cellular signal is greater than the perceived signal strength and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements); and provide an output based on the baseline RF environment (para 0071-0076],fig. 2, base station node provide the baseline RF environment from the incoming information f the perceived signal strength and wherein the best signal measurement represents a measurement from the plurality of signal measurements).
As per claim 18, Rahman teaches non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17, wherein the plurality of signal measurements include one or more of: reference signal received power (RSRP) measurements, reference signal received quality (RSRQ) measurements, channel quality indicator (CQI) measurements, or signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) measurements (para 0077], signal measurements include one or more of: reference signal received power (RSRP) measurements).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3-5, 10,14-15,19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman further view of US 20130157680 A1 Morita et al. (Hereinafter “Morita ").
As per claim 3, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, Morita teaches wherein the measurement period is one week or longer (para 0107-0105], management server and femto station stationary stations so the measurement is long term).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the combination system of Rahman by wherein the measurement period is one week or longer as suggested by Morita, this modification would benefit Rahman for reducing interference in uplink transmission in a mobile communication network.
As per claim 4, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, Morita teaches wherein the plurality of signal measurements are received from one or more of a measurement device or a network node, wherein the measurement device includes a fixed wireless access (FWA) device (para 0003], measurement device is femto base station which is a fixed wireless access device).
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 3.
As per claim 5, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, Morita teaches further comprising: collecting, by the server, information associated with a fixed wireless access (FWA) mobile directory number (MDN), wherein the information is associated with one or more of: a measurement period, the FWA MDN, an FWA location, FWA movement within the measurement period, a list of connected network nodes and frequency bands, and a best RF signal received from each network node and each frequency band (para 0003] , 0107-0105], collecting by the management server the information from the femto base station wherein the base station is located in particular building which is fixed and thereby the location of the femto base station).
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 3.
As per claim 10, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, Morita teaches further comprising: determining, by the server, whether a network slice service level agreement (SLA) is capable of being satisfied based on the baseline RF environment (para 0062], determines the threshold level being satisfied based on the target value and calculated value as per the agreement).
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 3.
As per claim 14, Rahman teaches server of claim 13, Morita teaches wherein the measurement period is one week or longer (para 0107-0105], management server and femto station stationary stations so the measurement is long term)..
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 3.
As per claim 15, Rahman teaches server of claim 13, Morita teaches wherein the plurality of signal measurements are received from one or more of a fixed wireless access (FWA) device or a network node (para 0003], measurement device is femto base station which is a fixed wireless access device)..
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 3.
As per claim 19, Rahman teaches non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17, Morita teaches wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the device to: determine whether a network slice service level agreement (SLA) is capable of being satisfied based on the baseline RF environment(para 0062], determines the threshold level being satisfied based on the target value and calculated value as per the agreement)..
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 3.
Claim(s) 9, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman further view of US PG Pub US 20130310068 A1 to FISCHER et al (hereinafter FISCHER).
As per claim 9, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, further comprising: FISCHER teaches tracking, by the server, the baseline RF environment from one measurement period to a next measurement period (para 0091] ,location server get information from the femto stations ).; and detecting, by the server, changes in the baseline RF environment based on the tracking (para 0091] , report new RFI information if the RFI information has changed compared to the previous report ).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the combination system of Rahman by tracking, by the server, the baseline RF environment from one measurement period to a next measurement period and detecting, by the server, changes in the baseline RF environment based on the tracking as suggested by FISCHER, this modification would benefit Rahman for enabling a efficient data processing in a mobile communication network..
As per claim 16, Rahman teaches server of claim 13, FISCHER teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: track the baseline RF environment from one measurement period to a next measurement period(para 0091] ,location server get information from the femto stations ).;; and detect changes in the baseline RF environment based on the tracking (para 0091] , report new RFI information if the RFI information has changed compared to the previous report ).
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 9.
Claim(s) 11-12, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman further view of US PG Pub US 20160080248 A1 to Rijnders et al (hereinafter Rijnders).
As per claim 11, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, Rijnders teaches further comprising: identifying, by the server, permanent signal disruption based on the baseline RF environment(para 0075], engine server determines that there is service disruption based on the environment feedback); providing, by the server, an indication of locations with permanent coverage disruptions for network planning and operations; providing, by the server, an indication of the locations for new site builds; or providing, by the server, advertising to households in locations without permanent coverage disruptors (para 0075], providing, by the server, an indication of locations with permanent coverage disruptions for network planning and operations;).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the combination system of Rahman by identifying, by the server, permanent signal disruption based on the baseline RF environment ; providing, by the server, an indication of locations with permanent coverage disruptions for network planning and operations; providing, by the server, an indication of the locations for new site builds; or providing, by the server, advertising to households in locations without permanent coverage disruptors as suggested by Rijnders, this modification would benefit Rahman for providing an automatic fail over service with a backup network connection at the CP, during a primary network outage, stemming from natural calamities, network component failure.
As per claim 12, Rahman teaches method of claim 1, Rijnders teaches further comprising; identifying, by the server, one or more of a change in serving access point name (APN) or a change in serving physical cell identifier (PCI), wherein the output is based on one or more of the change in serving APN or the change in serving PCI (para 0075], identifying by the server ). 20160080248
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 11.
As per claim 20, Rahman teaches non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 17, Rijnders teaches wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the device to: identify one or more of a change in serving access point name (APN) or a change in serving physical cell identifier (PCI), wherein the output is based on one or more of the change in serving APN or the change in serving PCI. (para 0075], identifying by the server associated with new backup service wherein the output is based on one or more of the change in serving APN ).
Examiner supplies the same rationale as supplied in claim 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6-8 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Prior arts made of record, not relied upon: US Patent Publication US 20180062985 A1; US Patent Publication US 20180331887 A1, US Patent Publication US 20180285594 A1
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented inthis Office action. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANEZ EBRAHIM whose telephone number is (571)270-7153. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8 AM to 5 PM If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hassan Phillips can be reached on (571) 272-3940. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANEZ C EBRAHIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights